Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
Latest activity
Classifieds
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Log in
Register
What's New?
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More Options
Advertise with us
Contact Us
Close Menu
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Ron Paul!
Search titles only
By:
Reply to Thread
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="dutchwrangler" data-source="post: 1619032" data-attributes="member: 4650"><p>@ Soonerwings... you've been a great debater. You are aware of the Constitution and as such understand it's premise. That we have a slight disagreement on philosophy is fine and all is well.</p><p></p><p>As for "General welfare", that's another subject of debate. Some believe it means the general welfare of the populace as a whole. I attribute it as speaking to establishing harmonious relations between the States (as the Constitution is a set of rules for the central government to deal with on those issues that concern the States). The generic concept of "general welfare", if applied to the people as individuals is a task reserved to the States as per the 10th Amendment. Original intent of course is the key to understanding this term. Understanding of the language used in the eighteenth century prompted me to purchase Samuel Johnson's 1755 Dictionary in order to understand their meaning as use in that era. I also downloaded a PDF version that is available.</p><p></p><p>I can't say I've given up entirely. I simply don't get to involved with those who aren't working off the same page. Since my time is finite my effort in debate is as well. When someone views government as the place to go for solutions then it's an uphill battle to convince them otherwise. Sadly most Americans have taken the position that all answers can be found in D.C. Such as it is, I'm less inclined to view the government of Oklahoma as threatening to my individual freedoms whereas the central government is a real threat. In the end though, if I no longer am willing to tolerate the abuse of Uncle Sugar I'll sell my guns and return to Canada where the central government is less powerful and threatening. This of course would require living snowbound for six months of the years, something I'm adverse to contemplating. <img src="/images/smilies/smile.png" class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" data-shortname=":)" /></p><p></p><p>@ WTJ... I admire Jefferson immensely. Classical Liberal all the way!</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="dutchwrangler, post: 1619032, member: 4650"] @ Soonerwings... you've been a great debater. You are aware of the Constitution and as such understand it's premise. That we have a slight disagreement on philosophy is fine and all is well. As for "General welfare", that's another subject of debate. Some believe it means the general welfare of the populace as a whole. I attribute it as speaking to establishing harmonious relations between the States (as the Constitution is a set of rules for the central government to deal with on those issues that concern the States). The generic concept of "general welfare", if applied to the people as individuals is a task reserved to the States as per the 10th Amendment. Original intent of course is the key to understanding this term. Understanding of the language used in the eighteenth century prompted me to purchase Samuel Johnson's 1755 Dictionary in order to understand their meaning as use in that era. I also downloaded a PDF version that is available. I can't say I've given up entirely. I simply don't get to involved with those who aren't working off the same page. Since my time is finite my effort in debate is as well. When someone views government as the place to go for solutions then it's an uphill battle to convince them otherwise. Sadly most Americans have taken the position that all answers can be found in D.C. Such as it is, I'm less inclined to view the government of Oklahoma as threatening to my individual freedoms whereas the central government is a real threat. In the end though, if I no longer am willing to tolerate the abuse of Uncle Sugar I'll sell my guns and return to Canada where the central government is less powerful and threatening. This of course would require living snowbound for six months of the years, something I'm adverse to contemplating. :) @ WTJ... I admire Jefferson immensely. Classical Liberal all the way! [/QUOTE]
Insert Quotes…
Verification
Post Reply
Forums
The Water Cooler
General Discussion
Ron Paul!
Search titles only
By:
Top
Bottom
